Plus one for triggered
Plus one for triggered
For someone with a university education you have an astoundingly weak grasp on most thingsOriginally Posted by Pepe
Yes, because I do that all the time.
Sure.
You've both ruined Pepe's Christmas.
I am not doing anything for Christmas so joke's on them.
Rand Paul IS BACK with his Festivus grievances.
That is cool.
What a don he is.Rand Paul IS BACK with his Festivus grievances.
Welp, that answered my main concern. Donald Trump does not understand the gravity of nuclear weapons, and is therefore unfit for office, irrespective of any other policies or personal characteristics.
I'd say this about the most latte-sipping liberal social justice President, too. It's a one-strike-only issue.
Lol you're an idiot.
He said it so that Russia would back down on their asserted desire to improve and further their nuclear program. And they retracted their statements immediately afterwards. It's the pathetic cuck mentality of the West of always being too pussy to challenge our enemies which has led to our current geopolitical crisis. You just don't get it, the same way being nice and reasonable to women doesn't work.
Sure, but I think you'd be embarrassingly unfit to be President as well. Consistency.
Nuclear weapons are far too dangerous to our entire species to be used as a bargaining chip, and it's worrying that people are starting to lose touch with that idea. I honestly believe that the reason nobody dropped a nuclear bomb during the Cold War was because there were still people who remembered what happened when the bombs were dropped on Japan. As that fades from our collective consciousness, the internal revulsion will dissipate, and only the numbers will remain. And then some idiot will eventually fail to see why we shouldn't drop another one, and it'll be on again.
There's no way we're getting through another century without someone dropping a nuclear weapon. But we shouldn't be making it easy, either. A new nuclear arms race would be a game of Russian Roulette between nation states, and one which there's a better than even chance that everyone loses.
Yeah let's just throw away our nuclear supremacy because liberals are 'afraid', seems like a great recipe for security in the coming century.
If it restarts the space race then I'm all for it!
Nobody starts shit over the number of nuclear warheads they have because so little can do so much damage. Superpowers have enough in the chamber and building more warheads is just a waste of money. $1.8m a pop which could be better spent towards resolving Trump's legal fights.
You are such an awful cunt
I hope to God some paramilitary organization or someone has the chops to assassinate Trump at his inauguration.
There had been, and there still would be, years of every sort, but the year 1914 will always remain unique. So at least it seemed to those who lived through it. To them it seemed that never would they be able to speak of all that they had seen then of course of human destinies, however much, still concealed by time and events, might be said or written about it later. How could they explain and express those collective shudders which suddenly ran through all men and which from living beings were transmitted to inert objects, to districts and buildings? How could they describe that swirling current among men which passed from dumb animal fear to suicidal enthusiasm, from the lowest impulses of bloodlust and pillage to the greatest and most noble of sacrifices, wherein man for a moment touches the sphere of greater worlds with other laws? Never can that be told, for those who saw and lived through it have lost the gift of words and those who are dead can tell no tales. Those were things which are not told, but forgotten. For were they not forgotten, how could they ever be repeated?
I read an interesting idea which suggested that in a several hundred years, the wars of the twentieth century will be thought of as one continuous conflict which ebbed and flowed, marking the collapse of colonial empires of the ideological war over its replacement. I may have mentioned this on the board before. It makes sense to me.
You'll be able to confirm from heaven.
If anything, the people who remembered, and were involved in, flattening Japan were less inclined to be turned off by nuclear weapons. Harry Truman was very reluctant to use them in Korea, which was partly down to having made the decision before, and people have latched onto that; but their non-use was mainly down to there being no need for them, and the worry was that China would get involved (which it did anyway), which would then draw the Soviet Union in. Dwight Eisenhower based the 'New Look' around them (and quickly emphasised tactical nuclear weapons when people started pointing out how rigid it was), and we were well ahead of the trend insofar as we clocked them as a shortcut in about 1940. It was ridiculous thermonuclear weapons, and, to a greater extent, the mistaken belief from about 1957 onwards that the Soviet Union had reached (or was close to reaching) the point where they could match American capabilities (nuclear sufficiency) that started to wind people back from seeing them as just another weapon, and even then it was only really in reference to the Soviet Union.
In the absence of any likely retaliation, and where they might have proven worthwhile, they would have been used. I don't buy the 'Nuclear Taboo' stuff in regards to them not being used in Vietnam, for example. It would have just been a waste of time to do so. They were always spoken about, and they would definitely have used them had there been a Japan-like 'twat x and win' opportunity, because Richard Nixon was always looking for one, and Henry Kissinger was mad for it having literally written the book on the practical value of tactical nuclear weapons. I suppose, with that in mind, a new arms race (for what that concept has been worth since about 1970) would do more to renew the sense of 'internal revulsion' than anything else.
I'm happy to defer to Lewis on this one. This is basically his jam.
It seems like a load of wank to me. Vladimir Putin seemed to be talking mainly about being able to penetrate anti-missile defences, since everyone knew about their wider programme of new weapons, but 1) anti-missile defences are bollocks (to the extent that they could never thwart a Soviet/Russian first strike); and 2) even if they did work, why would they be the only reason not to murder-suicide the world?
How can the US have enough proof of Russian interference to sanction Russia but the election results aren't called into question?
Something, something email server
What a MELTDOWN. Did half the world chuck American officials out when they got busted phone-tapping their leaders? I can't remember.
https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/814637370494582786
Thread there. This whole thing us so fucked up.
According to Kikó: Trump is tied up with Epstein, Prince Andrew etc.
This is a monstrous shitfest all round.
There has clearly been Russian influence in this. But they're just donning it all now, brokering peace in Syria on the fly.
Does this count as Russia winning the Cold War by playing the long game?
Ugh. This was always the end goal of loser-ass Dems and it seems to be working even among those that can read...
The accusation is that Russia hacked both the RNC and the DNC but they only released stuff from the DNC (probably true but they refuse to provide evidence) because they think Hilary is a cunt and Trump is easily manipulated (both true)
To avoid owning the fact that their candidate sucked and all these Washington dumbasses thought their job in the big house was a lock to the point they were already picking the wallpaper of their corner office out. They've gone on about Russia as that's surely the only reason their shitty candidate could lose against the biggest joke to run for office.
But at the end of the day, what have the Russians actually done? Outside of making people more informed on the idiots running their party? Nothing. They haven't hacked voting machines or anything. Clinton lost so badly that they're only a few seats away from the Republicans could CHANGE THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION. but yeah, RUSSIA.
These people are so awful, dropping a nuclear bomb on DuPont Circle would do more good for the World than any amount of these assholes foreign policy suggestions.
What if they have dirt on Trump? Will they use it to manipulate him when he's in office?
Have you read this?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us...ction-dnc.html
Chill the fuck out. You can't have the Russian government ordering the infiltration of US government servers. That's beyond unreasonable.
That being said, the sanctions and expulsion of diplomats was a terrible move on the Democrats' part. Putin can take the moral high ground and refuse to "engage" such "petty" tactics, knowing full well that all of these sanctions will end in 3 weeks. Meanwhile Trump gets to make Obama and the Dems look weak and silly by reverting everything they just did. It's so dumb.
@ Phon
The DNC isn't a government entity so let's try again.
The US and the U.K. also do this across the world. As the quote goes 'The CIA getting annoyed that a foreign intelligence agency has helped to install a far right authoritarian is a turn up for the books'.
We helped get Yeltsin elected ffs.
Read that NY Times article.
Don't be pedantic. The hacks affected US government officials as well as the governing process. The fact that the DNC isn't "part of government" doesn't change anything.
Yared Tamene, the tech-support contractor at the D.N.C. who fielded the call, was no expert in cyberattacks. His first moves were to check Google for “the Dukes” and conduct a cursory search of the D.N.C. computer system logs to look for hints of such a cyberintrusion. By his own account, he did not look too hard even after Special Agent Hawkins called back repeatedly over the next several weeks — in part because he wasn’t certain the caller was a real F.B.I. agent and not an impostor.
I already had and none of it is new information. Russian troll farms being activated against Ukraine was covered extensively at the time. What's supposed to blow my mind?
I'd think there's a stern difference between hacking a government entity and hacking a special interest group.
That people still put any weight into what the NYT has to say.
The NYT is a good paper and a worthwhile source. You just have to understand the subject they're talking about prior to reading the article to pick out the bullshit as they're just as prone to use anonymous sources to back a point they agree with as everyone else.
Translation: it's a liberal biased newspaper that has the same views as me.
Pray tell what that tangible difference is?
None of this Russia stuff changes anything about why the Democrats lost. They were elected as the anti-war party who got involved in another five of them and bombed the fuck out of people across the world. They were the anti-Wall Street party who hired Goldman Sachs to run the treasury and bail the fuck out of them. They were the pro-immigration party that deported more people than any other administration. They were the workers party but not a single one of these fuckos has ever had a job outside of working at a think tank. They're the party of the left but they hate anyone left of David Cameron.
They are a such a series of failures that a shitty nation with no economy, crouching on a wooden chair, wearing Adidas shell suits and shooting up Krokodil managed to own them. It's an embarrassment.
The NYT isn't liberal.
Gee idk what's the difference between hacking the CIA and PETA, dickhead?
That's what you took from the article? 'Russian troll farms'?
Jesus Christ use your brain. If the intention is for the a sovereign government to undermine the campaign of the candidate (and party) they don't like, and if the result is that their hacks had an observable outcome on the election, it doesn't matter which neighborhood of DC the servers are located.
I'm on mobile. I'm not going through the whole thing point by point. It doesn't change anything. They lost because Democrats failed, not because Russia.
If we're doing reading recommendations, listen to the Adam Curtis episode of Chapo Trap House
https://m.soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-...-curtis-121216
Reply With Quote
